₦airaland Forum

Empiree:
^^^

Yup, thats the way they understood it. That's the way i understand it. ola anobi, ola this and that still go back to Allah. This is what i called was mustahab earlier. That's not calling on the prophet. Again, we simply have people who gone overboard.

As for Ya rasulullah, allow me to bring opinion of Dr. Bilal Philips. He said if you have the intention that nabi (saw) will provide your need when you say 'Ya rasulullah', then there is problem of calling upon him. But merely saying "Ya rasulullah salam alaika" doesn't involve calling upon him. The same is true of saying Ya sheikh fulan if it is not about calling upon them at all. May Allah ease our affairs

I don't think mustahab can be used for this practice, since the Prophet (SAW) and the companions never did such.

The danger in this practice especially for the laymen is what we have found in people going overboard. It is wiser and safer to stick with the sunnah. Allahuma ameen to your prayer.

Empiree:
This argument has been around for donkey years. No Ulama ever considered tawasul of nabi(saw) to be shirk. It is what yoruba people consider "Ola Anobi". So you people saying all those ulama in nigeria, our babas were upon shirk for saying ola anobi?. I found that strange. Till today, majority still say that. Meanwhile, Sheikh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab never considered ist shirk but makruh and he never had problem with making du'a using status or glory of nabi(saw). His problem is calling upon the dead directly which is wrong and which is understood.

It is always best to avoid going to graves of awliya and ask them for things especially with the way young people are going about it. People always abuse. However, muslims do tawasul at the prophet's grave in medina during Haj. So are you saying it is shirk when nabi already said his grave would not be place of worship. And the reason Ulama especially in nigeria say 'ola anobi' is by many of his virtues, birth, lineage, his status before Allah. etc. Nabi didnt need to say that.

Read Ibn Abdul Wahhab's note in the attachment.

Bro, we are actually saying the same thing. I never said "ola anobi" is shrik, read my responses again. What brought us here is the ideology that we should "travel" to graves, and do tawasul, and by extension, istigatha (seeking help)...this is contrary to the Qur'an and what the Prophet (SAW) taught the companions.

People go to the graves of Imams and awliyahs and say Ya Hussein, Ya Sheikh fulan etc. even Ya Muhammad and claim they are doing tawasul. This is not permissible in Islam and it is Shirk! This is were I brought the issue of shirk.

With respect to "ola anobi" please read the following:

Imam Mahmud Al-Alusi said in his "Ruh ul-Ma'ani" in Tafsir of the verse "Seek Wasilah to Him" (Maidah: 35)

…And after (saying) all this, I do not see any wrong in Tawassul to Allah with status (Jah) of the Prophet (saw) alive or dead, and what is meant by "Jah" returns to attributes from attributes of Allah... so the meaning of the saying of the one who say: "Allah, I do Tawassul with status of Your Prophet (saw) that you fulfill my need" will be: "Allah, make Your love for him as a Wasilah in fulfilling my need". And there is no difference between this and your saying: "Allah, I do Tawassul with Your Mercy that you do this and that", as the meaning is also: "Allah make your Mercy as a Wasilah for me in this action" and I do not see any wrong in swearing upon Allah with status of him (saw) in this meaning, and the kalam in Hurmah is same as kalam in Jah, and this does not come in tawassul and Iqsam with dhat at all.

Yes, the Tawassul with Jah (status) and Hurmah (dignity) did not come from any of the Sahabah. Maybe this is because they were fearing that people found in their minds something (confusing), as they left Tawassul with idols, and then pure Imams coming after them followed them (in not doing Tawassul with Jah). And the Prophet (saw) left the destruction of the Ka'bah and its building on the foundations of Ibrahim (aley salam) as people were close from time of Kufr as it is established in the "Sahih".

And what we mentioned, it is only to prevent difficulty for people (who do Tawassul with Jah) and running away from the claim of their misguidance, as some people claim... and the best for us are reported du'a that come in the Book and the detailed Sunnah because it is not hidden for people of fairness that what Allah taught him, what the Messenger (saw) (taught), what the Sahabah did, and what people after them accepted fully is better, more complete, more beneficial and more secure...

Source

I believe our Babas do understand this with respect to first bold in red, that is why I was pointing out to you that "ola olohun ti n be lara anobi". And as rightly pointed by the scholar, this cannot be found in teachings of the Prophet (SAW) or the deeds of his companions. This is the point I want us to consider and not just overlook.

Empiree:
^^^

* The verse you quoted is talking about mushrikun of Makkah. They offered their sacrifices to and called on thier so called intermediaries directly. Quran itself affirmed this in the same verse you quoted.


* MUslims on the other hand used whoever they believe was pious. Their du'a goes directly to Allah and they used the pious man or awliya or the prophet as a means. So there is distinction here and it is not compulsory either. It is mustahab. Albaqir already posted evidences. And i have told you that unless you believe that saying "ola anobi" is shirk", then you gonna have to proof that. I don't need to go back to this. Omo ti won ba fi ola baba re be ti ko gbo, omo ale ni. So i can say to someone "mo fi ola baba re be e". I use your father (dont mean yours) to intermediate.

What the idolaters do (sacrifices, and calling, etc) is called worship, note that dua'a is also worship, so the idolaters give excuses that, no o, they are only seeking means to Allah (SWT), and you also are saying the same thing. Mind you, there are a lot of evidences that shows that people call on these awliya, Imams and even the Prophet (SAW) directly amd seek help, and claim they are only seeking means to Allah (SWT)... Were is it stated that it is mustahab to seek means through the prophets and awliyah? Alb.aqir brought no substantive evidence, it shouldn't be difficult to find evidences if this is mustahab, the Prophet (SAW) taught a lot of dua's, mention one of this dua's that uses the Prophet (SAW) as a means, not only that, by extension, from the sahabas that is known, including the ahl-l-bayt, who uses the "ola anobi" in their dua's, and please, it should be authentic.

It should be noted that I am not against seeking means to Allah (SWT) through known pious people who are alive by asking them to pray to Allah (SWT) on your behalf, for that is established in the sunnah.

Empiree:
* Another example i gave was solati Ibrahimiya after at-tahiya. What do you think we are doing?. If prophet(saw) did not teach such waseela, why did Aimmah made it obligatory to recite solati Ibrahimmiya as precondition in obligatory salat?. Think about it.

The content of the solat does not suggest waseelah, we are basically asking Allah (SWT) to send His Blessings on these Prophets, this is established in the Qur'an and the sunnah.

Empiree:
* And why did you put Allah in the creation here bro?. When i said Nabi(saw) is the best of tawasul, i was talking about creation. He is the best of tawassul in this sense. Why did you put Allah in here?.

Then you should have made it clear, you were responding to a post I had stated using Allah (SWT) beautiful names, automatically, I would think you are neglecting that.

Empiree:
* I do not argue using our so called deeds but do we have any good deeds now free of conditions?. You can hardly see that today. Everyone including govt does "good deeds" on condition(s).

If you can't use your good deeds, then use Allah's beautiful names. When you say "ola anobi" I asked before, who gave "anobi" the "ola"?! Is it not "ola olohun ti o n be lara anobi ni"?! Why not ask Allah for his "ola" directly, so there wouldn't be issues, when it is obvious people go to the extreme, just like the Christians calling on Isa (AS) and seeking help and eventually calling him god?!

Empiree:
Now, let's take karama sheikh Kamaldeen Al Adabi(ra) for instance. That was really good deed he used to ask for rain. Why didnt those sahaba use thier deeds for rain instead of going to Ibn Abbas(ra)?. Was Sheikh Kamal(ra) greater than them?. Did they not have a good deed to beseech Allah with?.

Umar (ra) went to Abbas (ra) who was alive, and asked that he pray to Allah (SWT) for rain, Abbas (ra) did not call on the Prophet (SAW) as a means to Allah, he didn't say "ola anobi" and in Umar's statement, he also prayed to Allah (SWT) for rain, that is what is established, ask Allah directly or ask a righteous person who are alive to ask Allah on your behalf. Why didn't they go to the grave of the Prophet (SAW)?! And what gives the status of righteousness (and karama) if not your deeds?!

Empiree:
We have got to the point today where if anyone claims to have good deeds, we gonna have to scrutinize him or her bcus most likely such deeds are not done with ikhlas. Therefore, in this sense, waseela through nabi(saw) is the best.

That is why I keep asking for authentic evidence from the Qur'an, from the mouth of the Prophet (SAW) and the examples of his companions that we should seek this type of waseelah through him is legislated, especially now that he is not alive.

Empiree:
It is similar to when nabi(saw) taught us At-tahiyah, where it says "assalamu alaika ayyuhannabiyu". Some scholars today tried to change it bcuz in their mindset, since nabi(saw) is dead, we are not supposed to say "assalamu alaika ayyuhannabiyu" bcuz this only makes valid sense when he(saw) was alive. After he is dead, we not supposed to say that according to those scholars. We asked, at what point did the nabi(saw) said the phrase should be changed?. They consider it 'shirk' to say the phrase bcuz nabi is not present. So the same thing applies to tawasul and istighatha.

Intermediation is not shirk. It is only mustahab. Even Sheikh Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahab did not consider it shirk. He only said it is 'makruh'.

Intermediation (waseela/tawassul or means) is not aqeeda issue at all.

The issue of At-tahiyah did not start recently, but it is not an issue here, and it is not an evidence for using the Prophet (SAW) as a waseelah. This is an issue of aqeedah, because it is about worship! It becomes shirk when you start calling on the Prophet (SAW) or Imams and awliyah and seeking help. This was never the practice of the righteous predecessors. I had already pointed out that using "ola anobi" is disliked by majority of scholars and some say it is bid'ah because there happens to be no authentic evidence for this in the shari'ah.

This is what Allah (SWT) told the Prophet (SAW) to tell the people when he was alive:

"Say, "I hold not for myself [the power of] benefit or harm, except what Allah has willed. And if I knew the unseen, I could have acquired much wealth, and no harm would have touched me. I am not except a warner and a bringer of good tidings to a people who believe." (Q7:188)

If the life and death of the Prophet (SAW) are the same, then in the light of the above verse, we should always direct our dua's to Allah (SWT) alone and seek a means to Him by following the teachings of the best of mankind!

I would implore you to bring evidence that it is mustahab to seek means to Allah (SWT) through the Prophet (SAW), according to who and based on what?! Thank you.

Empiree:
Sorry, it is THROUGH. My thought writes faster than my pen But i think i set it right later in my post.

Okay bro, I just wanted clarification.

Empiree:
Very simple bro. There are other evidences that he (saw) thought to visit/tawasul. Today, it seems some condemned visit to the grave of nabi with intention of that alone. This is strange to me. Now they condemn tawassul/waseela too. So basically they are trying to eradicate it altogether. No evidence against visiting the graves for that purpose only. There are evidences we can make journey to visit. We all may not like it. But this is different entirely. We talking about dalil here. There is no restriction to visiting during or outside of Hajj

I hope the evidences you are talking about is not the ones already presented here?! If you want to visit the Prophet's grave for tawasul, then you are not following the Prophet (SAW), why? The Prophet didn't teach us to perform tawasul at his grave, nor did any of the great companions, including Ali (ra) perform such at his (SAW) grave!

Empiree:
majority?. I hope you know tawasul/waseela is what we termed "ola anobi" in yorubaland. That's for short. "Olohun, mo fe ko ile. mo fe ra motor, mo fe ni lari, fun mi ni iyawo alalubarika ni ola anobi muhammad(saw)" This is waseela(tawasul) and it is valid. There is no better tawasul than that of the prophet. You think our deeds worth it?. Our deed is greater than the prophet even if done sincerely?. Absolutely not. The best of tawasul is nabi himself. We see this indirectly in the Qur'an and sunnah. Remember ayah "Laqodijakun rosulu". Remember solati ibrahimiyah made fard in salat?. what do you think we are doing?. The Aimmah made is fard to send salaam on the prophet as precondition for our acceptance of salat even though we know it is not necessarily fard. So i dont get where "majority" are against using nabi in this regard. So solati ibrahimiyah we recite in salat is waseela just like zakat is waseela for Ramadan.

We read these things everyday but we just read over it mechanically. We dont ponder that much. The best of waseela is nabi.

How can you say the best of tawassul is nabi himself or there is no better tawasul than that of the Prophet (SAW)?! Who gave nabi the status, the honour, and everything?! Allah (SWT) says call on me, use my beautiful names, and yet you overlook that and say nabi is the best of tawassul?! You claim your deeds are not worthy, but Allah (SWT) never gave us the permission to call on him through his dead prophets or the righteous slaves, also, the Prophet (SAW) never taught his companions, all his life, to use his name in their dua's as a waseelah, so where do we get this type of tawassul from?!

Let me just bring two quotes that I believe explains my stand:

" Al-Shanqeeti (may Allaah have mercy on him) said:

Note that the majority of scholars are of the view that what is meant by waseelah here is drawing close to Allaah by obeying His commands and avoiding that which He has forbidden, in accordance with the teachings brought by Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), doing that sincerely for the sake of Allaah alone, because this is the only path that leads to the pleasure of Allaah and attaining what is with Him and what is good in this world and in the Hereafter.

The basic meaning of the word waseelah is a path that brings one near to something. Here it means righteous deeds, according to scholarly consensus, because there is no other way of drawing close to Allaah apart from following the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). Based on this, there are many verses which explain the meaning of waseelah, such as the following (interpretation of the meaning):

"And whatsoever the Messenger (Muhammad) gives you, take it; and whatsoever he forbids you, abstain (from it)"[al-Hashr 59:7]

"Say (O Muhammad to mankind): 'If you (really) love Allaah, then follow me'"[Aal 'Imraan 3:31]

"Say: Obey Allaah and obey the Messenger"[al-Noor 24:54]

And there are other similar verses.

It was narrated from Ibn 'Abbaas that what is meant by waseelah is need.

Based on this, the words narrated from Ibn 'Abbaas, "Seek with Him al-waseelah" mean, seek your needs from Allaah, for He alone is the one who is able to meet them. This is further explained by the verses in which Allaah says

"Verily, those whom you worship besides Allaah have no power to give you provision, so seek your provision from Allaah (Alone), and worship Him (Alone)"[al-'Ankaboot 29:17]

"and ask Allaah of His Bounty"[al-Nisa' 4:32]

And by the hadeeth: "If you ask, then ask of Allaah."

....The correct view concerning the meaning of waseelah is that of the majority of scholars, that it means drawing closer to Allaah by worshipping Him alone, in accordance with the teachings of the Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). The tafseer of Ibn 'Abbaas comes under this heading, because calling upon Allaah (du'aa') and praying humbly to Him when asking for one's needs is one of the greatest forms of worship which is waseelah or seeking to draw closer to Him and attain His pleasure and mercy.

From this it may be understood that what many of the heretics and followers of ignorant men who claim to be Sufis say, which is that what is meant by waseelah in the verse is the Shaykh who has the power of mediation between him and his Lord, is ignorance, blindness and obvious misguidance; it is toying with the Book of Allaah. Taking intermediaries is the essence of the kufr of the kaafirs, as Allaah clearly stated when He said concerning them

"[They say:] We worship them only that they may bring us near to Allaah"[al-Zumar 39:3]

"and they say: 'These are our intercessors with Allaah.' Say: 'Do you inform Allaah of that which He knows not in the heavens and on the earth?' Glorified and Exalted is He above all that which they associate as partners (with Him)!"[Yoonus 10:18]

Every one who is accountable must understand that the way to attain the pleasure of Allaah and His Paradise and His mercy is to follow His Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). Whoever deviates from that has gone astray from the straight path.

"It will not be in accordance with your desires (Muslims), nor those of the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), whosoever works evil, will have the recompense thereof"[al-Nisa'4:123]

The meaning of waseelah that we have explained here is also the meaning in the verse where Allaah says

"Those whom they call upon desire (for themselves) means of access to their Lord (Allaah) as to which of them should be the nearest"[al-Isra' 17:57]

Another meaning of waseelah is the status in Paradise which the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) told us to ask Allaah to grant to him, and we hope that Allaah will give it to him, because only one person will be entitled to it, and he hoped that he would be the one[Adwa' al-Bayaan, 2/86-88]

Source


Jalal ud din Suyooti in his work :الأمر بالاتباع والنهي عن الابتداع السيوطي -
Under the Chapter تعظيم الأماكن التي لا تستحق التعظيم (Veneration of those places which are not applicable for veneration)

First he replied those who say that our prayers are accepted at these places or graves or shrines etc He replied by saying:

Kuffar pray in front of Idols and with the Wasilah of Idols and their prayers are Accepted ,then Rain comes to them, Help comes to them , Afiyah comes to them as Allah says (in Bani Israeel:20) On each these as well as those We bestow from the bounties of your Lord. And the bounties of your Lord can never be forbidden [Page 124 with the tehqeeq of Shaykh Mashoor bin Hasan aal Salmaan publihed by 0101 ه / 0991 م ، دار ابن القيم للنشر والتوزيع ، الدمام ، ط 0 ]

On page 139 he said:

[b]For Verily visiting the graves with the intention that our prayers will be accepted is not allowed and it is closer to Haraam. Sahaaba faced so many difficulties after the death of Prophet (peace be upon him) (for example) drought came to them,........ so Why didn't they come to the grave of Prophet of Allah? Why didn't they request him (peace be upon him) for rain? Why they didn't call at his grave?

Prophet (SAW) is the highest of the creation in the sight of Allah In fact at the time of drought OMAR (Ra) went to Eid GAH with Abbas RA and asked him to pray for rain (prayer of istesqa see Sahih bukhari for detailed athar). They never prayed near grave of Prophet (peace be upon him). O Muslim If You are follower of Allah like your Salaf as Saleh were so follow them, do Research of Correct Tauheed, Do not Worship other then Allah, Do not Make Partners of Allah. As Allah Commanded (Therefore worship Me.) and Allah says (So whoever hopes for the meeting with his Lord, let him work righteousness and associate none as a partner in the worship of his Lord.'')[/b] (end)

Source, the same as above.

AlBaqir:
# There is NOTHING to refute because you brought NOTHING. You are only being stubborn and labouring to defend nothing. And here you trying to use analogy yet you failed woefully in it.

Qur'an is clear as per ayah above. Your bogus Bukhari hadith is exposed. We challenge you to name just one prophet each which Jew and Christian took their GRAVE to worship. Here you are sweating. Must you defend nothing?

# Here's Qur'an talking about Ashabul Kahf and what believers after them did:

Surah Al-Kahf, Verse 21:


And thus did We make (men) to get knowledge of them that they might know that Allah's promise is true and that as for the hour there is no doubt about it. When they disputed among themselves about their affair and said: Erect an edifice over them-- their Lord best knows them. Those who prevailed in their affair said: We will certainly raise a MASJID over them.

# A masjid over the dead servant of Allah?! Allahuma Akbar.

There are Islamic historian who submit that the holy Makkah - Masjid al-haram house several Prophets of Allah as their graves. Even if you reject it, will you reject that ayah above? Or was Allah condemning those believers in remembering the Ashabul kahf ni?


# Repeatedly on this thread we continue to submit to you from sahabah to your various salaf (tabi'in and ulama of the past) who used to do Ziyarat not only to the grave of Nabi Muhammad (salallahu alayhi wa ahli) but also graves of those whom they considered awliya. Do me a favour label them all MUSHRIQUN and grave worshippers before I will take you serious.

# From that topic, to save face, you jump like a mountain goat to reward of Ziyarat to Karbala. We offer you explanation.

# Now to a bogus Bukhari/Muslim hadith.

* Please it is not by force to reply as I can see your obsessions to reply. If you don't have clear evidence and logical deductions, STOP QUOTING ME PLEASE!

Perhaps bro. Empiree can continue with your fruitless obsessions to reply. Pardon me for using strong words. I just discovered you are not ready to discuss gentlemanly.

Khuda Nighador (God protect you).

I could sense you trembling just by the challenge, so in order to safe face, you just started rambling and ranting...This is very hilarious...

I had just advised you to always apply wisdom, and try to learn what revealed text says, but nope, it seems grave worship is just so appealing to you...So the verse about the companions of the cave is evidence to build mosque over graves?! Subhanallah! Then you now went further to quote a historian and speculations....Is this how you reach understanding of your creed?! This is beyond pathetic! That is how you quoted the saying of the Queen of Sheba as what Allah (SWT) says...Is it that difficult to differentiate when Allah (SWT) is relating a story and what the characters in the story are saying from Allah's legislation of what to do and not to do?! Did the Prophet (SAW) say the verse gives permission to build Mosques over graves?!

If you are too slow to learn, Allah (SWT) says: "And the mosques are Allah's, therefore call not upon any one with Allah" (Q72:18)

When you start building Mosques over graves, are they for Allah (SWT) alone then?! So you would stand over Prophets (and by extention, your Imams) to observe your prayers when it is prohibited to even seat on graves?! Is that showing respect to these individuals?! Why don't you think before typing sef?!

I see you cannot give response to my queries and challenges, so you want to run away, no problem, this is a public forum, you don't need to become emotional when you have been exposed as a caller to what was not prescribed in the Qur'an nor was ever taught by the best of mankind (SAW). Na dreams, and fabricated stories are your evidences, and you claim to follow the Prophet (SAW)?!

Verily falsehood has no foot to stand on....

AlBaqir:
To the Ibn Taymiyyun ( the sino, Rashduct4luv, iamgenius and the rest)

# Imam Ibn Abi Shaybah:


Malik ad-Dar i.e. treasurer of Umar (RA) relates: The people were gripped by famine during the tenure of Umar (Ibn-ul-
Khattab). Then a man walked up to the grave of Prophet and said: O Messenger of Allah! ask for rain from Allah for your Ummah who is in dire straits. Then he saw the Prophet (SAW) in dream. The Prophet (SAW) said to him, Go over to Umar, give him my regards and tell him that the rain will come to you. And tell Umar that he should be on his toes, he should be on his toes (he should remain alert). He went over to see Umar and passed on to him the tidings. On hearing this, Umar broke into a spurt of crying. He said, O Allah, I exert myself to the full until I am completely exhausted.


Source: Al-Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah Volume 011, Page No. 118, Hadith No. 32538


# Imam Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani:

Ibn Abu Shaybah transmitted it with a " SOUND CHAIN OF TRANSMISSION" the narration from Abi Salih as Samaan
from Malik al Dar the treasurer of Umar (ra) that : The people were gripped by famine during the tenure of 'Umar
(Ibn al-Khattab). Then a man walked up to the Prophet's grave and said, "O Messenger of Allah, please ask for rain from Allah for your Ummah who is in dire straits." Then he saw the Prophet (SAW) in dream… till the end of hadith. Sayf narrates in his Fatuh, the one who saw the dream was Bilal bin Harith al Mazni who was one of the sahaba.

Source: Fath ul Bari : Volume No.2, Page No. 495



Note : Sheik Nasir ud-din Albani tried his best to prove that " Malik ad-Dar and Abu Salih as-Samaan" present in the sanad of this hadith are unknown narrators (majhul).

To the contrary, his flaws are exposed:

* Imam Ibn Sa'ad said: “Malik ad-Dar was a slave freed by ‘Umar bin al-Khattab. He reported traditions from Abu Bakr as-Siddiq and ‘Umar, and Abu Salih Samman reported traditions from him. He was "WELL KNOWN (MAROOF)"

Source: Ibn Sa‘d, at-Tabaqat-ul-kubra Volume 006, Page No. 12, Narrator No. 1423

* Imam Ibn Hibban has attested to the trustworthiness and credibility of Malik ad-Dar : Imam Ibn Hibban Said: Malik bin
‘Iyad ad-Dar He has taken traditions from Umar Faroq, and Abu Saleh al-Samman, and He was a slave freed by ‘Umar
bin al-Khattab.

Source: Kitab uth-Thiqat Volume 005, Page No. 384

* Imam al-Dhahabi said about Malik ad-Dar, He (Malik ad-Dar) was a slave freed by ‘Umar bin al-Khattab, He has taken traditions from Abu Bakar as-Siddiq.

Source: Tajrid Asma' al-Sahabah, by Imam Dhahabi, Volume 002, Page No. 44

* Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani also in al-Isabah fi tamyiz-is-sahabah - Ibn Hajr, Volume 006, Page No. 164, #8350

Well you have brought this narration before I think, but it is still not evidence, the unknown man saw in a dream were the Prophet (SAW) instructed him to go and meet Umar (ra), but what is established from KNOWN companions of the Prophet (SAW) during drought is the following:

Narrated Anas: Whenever drought threatened them, 'umar bin Al-Khattab, used to ask Al-abbas bin 'Abdul Muttalib to invoke Allah for rain. He used to say, "O Allah! We used to ask our Prophet to invoke You for rain, and You would bless us with rain, and now we ask his uncle to invoke You for rain. O Allah ! Bless us with rain." And so it would rain. (BukhariBook #17, Hadith #123)

I'm not even going to disturb myself on the authenticity of the narration, that is a waste of my time, just inform us how the sahabas after the incidence of the unknown man, started trooping to the grave of the Prophet (SAW) to seek his interventions abi, they never had needs ni?!

AlBaqir:
# Sometimes out of no reasonable submission, you labour around what is not necessary. I have given you 3 points with differences between wahjibat and Mustahabat. Those are reasonable enough. Take it or continue giving stories.

Tell us were deeds not mentioned in the Qur'an or in any authentic narrations from the blessed mouth of the Prophet (SAW) are then automatically having huge rewards than obligatory deeds which happens to be a pillar of the religion?!

AlBaqir:
# You sound like unreasonable Christians who used to say Muhammad's parents names were not mentioned in the Qur'an, or Jesus name was mentioned more than Muhammad.

For a fact, Hussein died 30+ years after revelation was completed So, why would such thing be reveal in the Qur'an?!

IF it is not mentioned in the Qur'an or by the Prophet (SAW), then it is not part of Islam! I am talking about pilgrimage to the graves of these Imams, and the speculated rewards associated with it!

AlBaqir:
# The news of Hussein death was rather brought to Nabi by several angels some of whom Nabi never saw before.

# And like I said earlier, to show the importance of the blessed land Hussein's blood will be spilled, Jubril gave the blessed soil to the Prophet which he kept dearly.

This is just pure story, so the Prophet (SAW) forgot to tell us the rewards associated with visiting his grandson's grave, or even his grave because...?!

AlBaqir:
# Ziyarat to Qabr whether that of Nabi or Imam Ali or Imam Hussain or the Aimmah buried at Jannatil Baqi, it is Mustahabat and their reward is super high. Any hadith that claimed it to be wahjib is nothing but exaggeration or lie.

Any reward not mentioned in the Qur'an or from the blessed mouth of the Prophet (SAW) is pure lie! Of course claiming it is wajib is just nonsense, but I am surprised that a respectable shi'a site can include such narrations to claim merits of visiting the graves of these Imams...

AlBaqir:
# Ziyarat to Nabi's Qabr is like visiting him while alive. That alone is a superabundant blessing. Many of your Sunni ulama (except the insignificant wahabis) have repeatedly defend this reward as stated in hadiths.

Is it the stories from a Bedouin Arab, or from unknown individuals that you are talking about?! I like the bold, since you have brought Qur'an 4:64 as one of your evidences, shall I also add the verse 65...

"But no! by your Lord! they do not believe (in reality) until they make you a judge of that which has become a matter of disagreement among them, and then do not find any straightness in their hearts as to what you have decided and submit with entire submission." (Q4:65)

So I ask, when would you start taking your disputes and disagreements to the grave of the Prophet (SAW)?! Since it is the same as when he (SAW) was alive, is he going to appear to you in real life or you would have to go back home and dream?!

AlBaqir:
sino

Your desperation is limitless. Again, show us a single reference either from the Qur'an or Bible or Jewish book of history where we can establish that Jews and Christian ever took the graves of their past Prophet as worship places. Which Prophet?. Simple as that, unfortunately you are here citing Saint Jose's grave. Was Saint Jose a Prophet of either of Jews or Christians? Saint Jose ko, Saint Matthew ni.

# Please try your stunt again later.

Firstly why not try and refute my example from the Qur'an, since you want to claim the narration is bogus, I challenge you to use the same reasoning to address this ayah (the bold) in the Qur'an:

"The Jews say, "Ezra is the son of Allah "; and the Christians say, "The Messiah is the son of Allah ." That is their statement from their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved [before them]. May Allah destroy them; how are they deluded?" (Q9:30)

Secondly, the quote in my post is a hint, it shows that the Jews (some of them or a sect) indeed took graves as places of worship, although it is categorically forbidden in Judaism as well as in Christianity.

Thirdly, because you are very parochial in your thinking, you didn't know that there is another narration which did not only state Prophets...

Narrated that he heard the Prophet (peace be upon him), five days before his death, saying, “I, before Allah, disown having taken anyone of you as a Khalil (close friend), for Allah has taken me as a Khalil as He took Ibrahim (Abraham) as a Khalil. Were I to have taken anyone from among my Ummah (nation) as a Khalil, I would have taken Abu Bakr as a Khalil. Beware! Those who came before you used to take the graves of their Prophets and righteous people as places of worship. Do not take graves as places of worship; I forbid you to do that.” (Sahih Muslim, no. 532)

If I can show you that they took the graves of righteous people (saints) as places of worship, what then would stop them, if they knew the grave site of their prophets, from taking such sites as a place of worship?!

Fourthly, I didn't even talk about the Christians, for it is obvious that they even worship their Prophet, Isa (as).

Fifthly, it is very pathetic that you would be asking such questions, have you forgotten we are talking about the Prophet (SAW) who gets inspired with regards to the past stories of previous prophets?! I asked you to show me were the Prophet (SAW) was talking about the Jews and Christians of hijaz?! Did the narration not indicate that it was about "those who came before you"?!

Finally, you don't say nonsense because you want to disagree with me, you should learn to apply wisdom, and learn more about the religion with respect to revealed/inspired text such as the Qur'an and the authentic hadiths

AlBaqir:
# See desperation to bring the athar down Like I said the athar is a dead blow to your Ibn Taymiyyah/wahabist aqeedah.

You are still not proving anything, as in you have not proved zilch! In your shi'a world, an unknown Arab, and dreams are were you establish your creed abi?! That is if, for argument sake, the hikayah is authentic!

AlBaqir:
First, there is nowhere al-Qurtubi faulted the athar. So also was his predecessor, Ibn Kathir.

Did they authenticate it? Did Ibn Kathir and Qurtubi use this narration to support this creed you follow?! Can you please provide the evidence for us to see?!

AlBaqir:
Second, it is a sheer lie from wherever you copied it that Ali Mutaqi al-Hindi faulted the athar by pointing to Dhahabi. I have attached the scan page of his Kanz al-ummal documenting the athar.

Now this is desperation, in your screenshot, it is stated there that "it is said in Al Mughniy, al Haytam bin Adi al Taai is Matrook (rejected)" and if Arabic is a problem, in the translation I presented, Ad Dhaabi is in parentheses! Oga u no sabi what that means ni? Na wa o

AlBaqir:
Third, Imam Bayhaqi (in Shu‘ab-ul-Imaan (Volume no: 3, Page no:495-496, Hadith No#4178) gives another authentic sanad to the athar. See the scan page attached (last two pics)

Lol, yeah another one, but authentic chain does not mean authentic story na, have you forgotten ni?! But the first narration in Qurtubi says this Arab man came 3 days after the death of the Prophet ( SAW ) while the one you are presenting now says the man came for hajj?! By the way, I requested you intimate us how only these Beduine, unknown individuals are the ones who knew about this creed while Ali (ra) and the rest of the companions were ignorant?!

AlBaqir:
This is the reason Ibn Kathir as weird as his Ibn Taymiyyah aqeedah was could not cast fault to the athar rather have to submit that it is: narrated by "JAMAAH (GROUP OF
SCHOLARS)" while considering it to be Hikayat al "mashur
(famous). HE DID NOT GIVE ANY JARH

Fourth, Imam Suyuti never faulted the athar; in fact he quoted Imam al-Bayhaqi

Lol, abeg tell us that he authenticated it or that this was also his belief, or just keep mute! I wonder why you no bring screenshot of the referenced book?!

Why you come skip the last scholar in my list?!

Well, I'll still repeat, even if the story is authenticated, it is what it, a story, and if we can't find evidences from the Qur'an, or the authentic statements of the Prophet in matters of legislated creed, you are just following your desires!

AlBaqir:
# This kind of bogus hadith is laughable. Grave of which Prophets did the Jews and Christians at the time of Nabi Muhammad in Hijaz took as a place of worship? Not even as far as Jerusalem.

* The greatest Prophet of the Jews was Musa, and that of the Christian was Jesus Christ. Qur'an only mentions the later was taken as God/son of God.

# Besides, no Muslim whether Sunni, Shia or Sufi has ever taken grave as a place of worship. If you have seen one with reasonable evidence, kindly submit it.

Of course it is bogus to you, when it speaks against your creed! First, who says the Prophet ( SAW ) was talking about the Jews and Christians living in Hijaz or those of his time?! Let me help you a little, the Qur'an says Jews take Uzair as son of God, using your thinking, we should say that the verse is bogus and laughable?! Anyway, just to give you a hint:

".....Karaite source. The famous Karaite ascetic and polemicist (and missionary)  Sahl Ben Matzliah HaCohen (910–990):
Translation:

How can I keep silent when Jews follow the custom of idolaters? They sit among graves of saintly persons and spend nights among tombstones, while they seek favors from dead men, saying, “Oh Jose the Galilean, grant me a cure!” or “Vouchsafe me a child!” They light lamps at the graves of saints and burn incense upon the brick altars before them and tie bowknots to the palmtree bearing the name of the saint as a charm for all kinds of diseases. They perform pilgrimage rites over the grave of these dead saints and make vows to them and appeal and pray to them to grant their requests. (Quoted in Nemoy, Leon, Karaite Anthology pp. 115-16)

This quite depicts what you are calling to, nay, what you practice when you go on pilgrimage to the tombs of Hussein (ra) and the likes....

Empiree:
First all, it seems we are talking about istighatha here. The verse with respect to that will continue to function till Qiyamah. As for going to the graves and beseeching the prophet or awliya Allah, this can be done with or without going there in the first place. And there seems to be slight difference btw istighatha and waseela. These two will function till Qiyamah. Now, i understand sending salaam on the prophet. No muslim worship the prophet at his grave. If nabi said his grave would not be center of worship, it is exactly that. Today, people troop his grave and beseech Allah for help through him. This is what Albaqir is saying. So my question is, if nabi said his grave would not be center of worship, are those people who beseech Allah at his grave worship the prophet?. That would be counterproductive.

Bro, at the bold, it seems contradictory, do you beseech the prophet (SAW) and awliya Allah, or you beseech Allah (SWT) through the the Prophet (SAW) and awliya?! You also said with regards to beseeching the Prophet (SAW) and the awliya, you do not need to visit their graves, then does it mean they are all hearing?!

What I believe to be reasonable, putting the warnings of the Prophet into proper perspective, is to just follow what the Prophet (SAW) taught us with regards to visiting graves.

Empiree:
Furthermore, even whenever muslims (sufi in particular) send salaam on the prophet outside of obligatory salat like group dhikr, tazkiyah, zawiya etc, some muslims still criticize them. So at what point is salaam on the prophet (saw) that does not conform with their ideology is agreed upon?. They criticize going to his grave. They criticize sending salaam on him(saw) that is different from their way. They criticize all salawat except solati Ibrahimiyah. So what is left exactly?

Lol, I believe the major issue is the exaggerations and activities that are not sanctioned in the shari'ah being carried out by some extreme sufis...

Empiree:
Also, if travelling from Makkah to Medina to visit his grave which is miles apart, then, that's TRAVELLING. This refutes the guy's claim that we can not travel for ziyara to his grave. Thats exactly what hujjaj do unless you can establish evidence from nabi himself that visit to his grave is part and obligatory act of Haj. I will like to have that proof please.

Actually the intention is to visit the Mosque, and since the graves are there then they can visit

Empiree:
We are not supposed to worship at the grave. Ziyara to the grave as define by nabi(saw) himself is in itself not act of worship but act of reflection. And this practice existed pre-islamic era. There is difference btw saying "Ya Allah, bless me with righteous child by the virtue of your prophet muhammad" and "Ya rosulallah, bless me a with righteous child. The former is directly seeking help from Allah through his noble prophet(saw). This is tawassul(waseela) and sahaba did this at his grave. According to our salafi brothers, 'follow the sunnah and sunnah of khulafa rashideen". Hence, khulafa did this practice. This is sahih. So seeking help really is not act of worship even if done at the grave. It only becomes act of worship if, only if worshiper believes in his heart that the one in the grave has power to provide independent of Allah. This is a matter of aqeedah in the heart really. So the former is allowed but the later amounts to shirk. We can not accuse fellow muslim of mushrik unless otherwise stated. Even from the explanation of sheikh Ibn Uthaymeen(ra) shows grave visit is not essentially act of worship. He emphasized intention in his comment on this.

Of course, that is why I brought up the reason as established by the Prophet (SAW) the reason for visiting graves. Allah (SWT) asked us to travel the land and reflect, but when it has to do with worship, then there is the need to employ caution, and learn what is legislated and what is not. There is a difference of opinion with tawassul using the (status of) Prophet (SAW),and it is disliked by the majority...

Empiree:
Lastly, as for the prophet not knowing what's going on after him, that seems to be apparent contradiction but in reality it is not. "my life is good for you, my death is good for you" . This is in two parts. The first part is about the status and meaning of the first hadith. The second part reconciles the apparent contradiction with the second hadith by contextualizing the latter through its variant wordings.


The Prophet said, upon him blessings and peace: “My life is an immense good for you: you bring up new matters and new matters are brought up for you. My death, also, is an immense good for you: your actions will be shown to me; if I see goodness I shall praise Allâh and if I see evil I shall ask forgiveness of Him for you.” (H.ayâtî khayrun lakum tuh.dithûna wa yuh.dathu lakum wa-wafâtî khayrun lakum tu`rad.u a`mâlukum `alayya famâ ra’aytu min khayrin h.amidtu Allâha wa-mâ ra’aytu min sharrin istaghfartu Allâha lakum.)

Narrated from Ibn Mas`ûd by al-Bazzâr in his Musnad (5:308-309 §1925) with a sound chain of trustworthy narrators as stated by:

1. al-Suyût.î in Manâhil al-S.afâ (p. 31 § and al-Khas.â’is. al-Kubrâ (2:281),

2. al-Haythamî in Majma` al-Zawa’id (9:24 §91),

3. al-Zarqânî in Sharh. al-Muwat.t.a’ (1:97) and his commentary on al-Qast.allânî’s Mawâhib al-Lâduniyya.

This narration is weak, and has many faults, you can read about it Here

As I had presented the narration which is corroborated by the verse of the Qur'an about Isa (AS) with regards to the fact that these Prophets (AS) do not know what we do after they had left this world, so this above narration is suspect, even if we probe further, we are over 1.2 billion, how are these our deeds presented to the Prophet (SAW)?! Is this not trying to start giving attributes of Allah (SWT) to the Prophet (SAW)?!

Empiree:
But if you ask for my personal opinion or what i do basically in regard to this?. I will tell you i do nothing beyond sending salaam on the prophet in any manner deem fit. I also beseech Allah's help through his nabi like saying "ola anobi" for instance. That's all. I dont do crazy this at the graves. I am yet to visit one actually. I am hoping to do that in sha Allah. However, as portray in yoruba movies where woman goes to the grave of her husband and say things like '(my husband) look down on us and your children. protect us, let us live good life bla bla bla". This is out of it. A muslim should desist from this. This is what mushrikun of makkah did. They believe whatever is in the grave is capable of doing things without Allah's permission. This is not waseela.

@Bold, the fact is that there is no help the dead can do for the living, on the contrary we are the ones to be praying for them as it is authentically established in the sunnah. The best way to seek waseelah is through Allah (SWT) and His beautiful names, our good deeds, and seeking righteous living individuals to make dua' for us, beyond these, as already mentioned, using the Prophet (SAW) has difference of opinion, but majority of scholars dislike it. Personally, I prefer calling on Allah (SWT) and using His most beautiful names, after all Allah (SWT) says: "Say: "Call upon Allah, or call upon Rahman: by whatever name ye call upon Him, (it is well): for to Him belong the Most Beautiful Names." (Q17:110) and "Call on me, I would respond to you." (Q40:60)

AlBaqir:
# Makrooh ko, Mubah ni.

On a more serious note, there are few points:

1. There are lots of amal specify both in Sunni and Shii traditions with "extraordinary reward" that doesn't make sense (at least to my understanding).

2. Not every tom, dick and harry hadith (even if its graded sahih) in Sunni or Shi'a hadith make any sense. Many of them are nothing but fabrications.

3. Wajibat vs Mustahabat (obligatory vs recommended):

# Surprisingly there are rewards specify in books of ahadith both in Sunni and Shi'a ahadith whose rewards are far greater than rewards of some Wajibat amal. For example, we read in Sunni book, an authentic hadith from Imam Hussain himself, that whoever weep for the ahl al-bayt, al-Jannah is sure for him


# The only thing understood is if you fail to do Wajibat amal, there is retribution which is not in Mustahabat. Reward of both could be same in daraja. The rationality behind this is Allah does not want to bore us with too many amal therefore, some were specified to be Wajibat which are just enough for success here in duniya and akhira. But that doesn't mean their reward should be highest.

* A good example is reward for Tahajjud - it is said that one could be raised to maqam Mahmud. Five daily prayer cannot give that. Yet Tahajjud is just mustahab.


Therefore, in my humble opinion, many ahadith on the Ziyarat to Imam Hussain's Qabr could fall in one of those 3 highlighted points. So, don't be terrify with its magnificent reward.

I quoted narrations about visiting grave of the grandson of the Prophet (SAW) as an obligatory act, not only so, it is stated that it is more rewarding than performing hajj which is categorically stated in the Qur'an and even hajj should be abandoned, a pillar of Islam, and you are here theorizing?! Even the tahajjud you mentioned is it not mentioned in the Qur'an?! Would your tahajjud be looked at first on the day of judgement?! Is it a key to paradise?! Do you have all the details of the rewards associated with the 5 daily prayers to start doing your comparison?!

So tell us, where is visiting Hussein's (ra) grave mentioned in the Qur'an?! Where is visiting his grave obligatory?! Why don't we have such rewards associated with visiting the grave of the Prophet (SAW)?! Is Hussein's grave greater than that of the Prophet (SAW)?! If no, where are the narrations stating the rewards for visiting the Prophet's grave?!

AlBaqir:
# What do you mean a story?! It is an athar with an authentic sanad. None of your Imam ever doubt that report. That single report is a dead blow to your belief.

Dead blow?! "AlBaqir eyan Mayweather" Which authentic sanad?! The one you conjured?! It is a fabrication, just like that of Al Utbi, I just can't understand why you guys like to support your claims with fabricated stories...

"Its related from Abu Sadiq (ra) that Imam Ali (ra) said: "Three days after burying the Prophet (Peace Be Upon Him) arab did came and did throw himself on the grave of the Prophet (Peace Be Upon Him), took the earth and throw it on his head. He said: "Ya Rasulallah! (Peace Be Upon Him) You did speak and we did hear, you learned from Allah and we did learn from you. Between those things which Allah did send you, is following: (4:64) I am the one, which is a sinner and now I did came to you, so that you may ask for me." After that a call from the grave did came: "Theres no doubt, you are forgiven!" [Tafsir al-Qurtubi, al-Jami li Ahkam al-Quran Volume 006, Page No. 439, Under the Verse, 4:64]

Comment: From this athar some people claim that this was the aqeeda of Imam al Qurtubi, but that is false because the narration is fabrication and no where al-Qurtubi authenticated it.


Scholars on this narration:

• 1. Muttaqi al Hindi quoted this naration in Kanzul Ummal and said:

(ad-Dahabi) said in al Mughni: al Haytam bin Adi al Taai is Matrook (rejected). [Kanz ul Ummal 4322]

• 2. as-Suyuti mentioned this narration in Jaam`e al Ahadeeth and said:

It is mentioned in al Mughni: al Haytam bin Adi al Taai is rejected. [Jaam`e al Ahadeeth 31/241]

• 3. Imam Ibn Abdul Hadi said

Some liars have even raised the chain to Alee bin Abee Taalib (as-Saarim al Munkee pg.246)

on page 247 he says
This story mentioned from al Arabi is not evidence, its chain is Dark”(end)
Source

AlBaqir:
# @underline, The command of Nabi as we have stated earlier is that " it is permissible to perform Ziyarat to the Qabr". It doesn't matter where you come from. That authentic athar revealed a Bedouin Arab who of course "travel" to Medina to visit Nabi. Last time I check, you still regard Ali as a rightly guided Caliph, therefore, if what the man did was wrong, Ali would have corrected him on that spot (just as he used to correct improper practices in his presence irrespective of who did it).

# The onus is rather on you guys to give us your "authentic" hadith where Nabi exclusively forbid making Ziyarat to Qabr for the sole purpose of Ziyarat to Qabr of whoever.

O you mean the fabricated athar of the Bedouin Arab abi...I wonder why it is a Bedouin Arab that understood the verse than even Ali (ra), or do we have authentic narrations from him to support your claims?! How many companions, tabiyeen and so on were involved in this traveling to visit graves?! Please give us the narrations!

When the Prophet (SAW) forbade traveling to visit any house of Allah, except 3, then it is traveling to visit graves of people that would be recommended abi?! And what I mean by traveling, I mean pilgrimage. What is the purpose of visiting graves in Islam?! Who will teach us this if not the Prophet (SAW), so let us learn:

The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: "Visit the graves, for they remind you of the Hereafter." (Narrated by Muslim, 976).

It was reported that 'Aa'ishah said that when it was her night for the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) to stay with her, he would go out during the latter part of the night to (the cemetery of) al-Baqee' and say, "Peace be upon you, dwellings of the believing people. There has come to you that which you were promised, …, and if Allaah wills we will follow you soon. O Allaah, forgive the people of Baqee' al-Gharqad." (Narrated by Muslim, 974).

So we see that we visit to get reminded of the hereafter or to pray for those in the grave...

AlBaqir:
# @underline, you mean people of your ideology?!

# What is the aim of going to Madina? To visit Nabi's mosque, and not to meet the owner of the mosque per se?


# Who told you I don't need to go to Nabi's Qabr to ask my needs? Ibn Abdulwahab or Ibn Taymiyyah or Ibn Baz?!

Again, Q.4:64 has clear the air.

# Of course, even courtesy demand you first greet the owner of a house/city before you request. Therefore, you say "as-Salam alayka Ya Rasulullah!" This is adab, and it is also proven from the authentic athar of that Bedouin Arab.

We have authentic hadith from the mouth of the Prophet (SAW) stating the rewards associated with observing salat in these 3 masaajid, of course traveling to Medina to pray is recommended, and also a mosque is the house of Allah (SWT), and Allah (SWT) says: "And the mosques are Allah's, therefore call not upon any one with Allah" (Q72:18), visiting the graves of the Prophet (SAW) and the pious predecessors is a plus, and you are to make salaam and salawaat on them...Asking for your needs at this place is not recommended by the Prophet (SAW) or can such be found in the Qur'an! What is authentic is warning against doing such, and clearly, it is an avenue to shirk

Also the Prophet (SAW) said:

'Aa'ishah and 'Abd-Allaah ibn 'Abbaas said: "When (death) approached the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), he started to cover his face with a cloak of his. When he became distressed he lifted it from his face and said, "May Allaah curse the Jews and the Christians, for they have taken the graves of their Prophets as places of worship." [The narrator said:] he was warning against doing what they did." (Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 425; Muslim, 531).

Abu Marthad al-Ghanawi said: the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: "Do not sit on graves and do not pray facing them." (Narrated by Muslim, 972).

Qur'an 4:64 is not to be taken in general terms as prove to go to the Prophet's grave, even in tafsir tabari, it pointed to those who the verse was revealed for and it was during the life of the Prophet (SAW), again if we continue reading, the next verse states:

"But no, by your Lord, they will not [truly] believe until they make you, [O Muhammad], judge concerning that over which they dispute among themselves and then find within themselves no discomfort from what you have judged and submit in [full, willing] submission."

So if the previous verse is evidence we can go to the Prophet's grave to seek forgiveness, as stated in the fabricated story, can we also use the above verse to carry our disputes to the grave of the Prophet (SAW) to judge?!

AlBaqir:
# You don't need to exaggerate Mr man. For a fact, it is not possible for every Muslims (over 1.6 billion still counting) to be going to Nabi's Qabr to fulfil their need. The point is whoever has the opportunity to visit Nabi and ask him to intercede for you before Allah (just like Q.4:64 puts it); SURELY, your request will be granted.

* Imagine! Salat in Makkah is more rewardable than Salat in any masjid. Asking Allah via Muhammad and in the presence of Muhammad (sallahu alayhi wa ahli) is far more guaranteed. We have seen this in the case of the hadith of Uthman Ibn Hunaif about the blind man.

Yeah exaggeration indeed, the population of those who go for hajj is more than a million, all asking for their needs via the Prophet (SAW) at the grave one after the other (calling on him, saying Ya Rasulallah) where he (SAW) warned not to turn to place of worship, when they can call on Allah (SWT) and ask Allah (SWT) directly in His house who is all hearing and all seeing doesn't look and sound contrary to the teachings of the Prophet (SAW) as directed by Allah (SWT) in the QUr'an?! Where is it stated by the Prophet (SAW) that fulfill your needs at my grave?! or call on me to help you pray to Allah (SWT) to fulfill your needs?!

Asking the Prophet (SAW) to intercede is subject to judgement day, it is a prayer we can say anywhere, it has nothing to do with mundane issues or problems you face.

I have discussed the issue of the blind man, and it was during the life of the Prophet (SAW) and not when he was dead!

AlBaqir:
# All that are rewards for the Ziyarat to the grave of Imam Hussain. And the hajj there is not meant Hajj wajib.

And do I need to remind you as greater as Ziyarat to the grave of Imam Hussein in Karbala, even Nabi that will not physically present, kept some soil of that holy place.

# Again, what does Shia do in Ziyarat?

Yeah right, it is not hajj wajib, it is hajj makrooh! Go tell that to a learner, not me!

AlBaqir:
# How is this ayah apply to the status of Muhammad (saws)?!

Do I need to remind you that ayah is in reference to Eesa (as) who will deny those so-called followers of his for corrupting religion after him.

# In the case of Muhammad, apart from Q.4:64, there are sahih ahadith which firmly established that the death of Nabi Muhammad is as beneficial to the believers as his being alive. This is a fact you need to deal with.

I have addressed these in my above response to empiree

AlBaqir:
# The story I quoted from ya book is sahih, and it was in the presence or from Ali who never rebuke the "Bedouin Arab" that "travel" to do the Ziyarat of Nabi. Besides, there are other ahadith which revealed Sahabah too did Ziyarat to the Qabr of Nabi.

It is still a story, in fact it is said to be fabricated, and Ibn Kathir called it a hikaya (a story that can be real or fictional). Even if it is authentic, it is still not a proof in a matter of legislated act of worship. Where did the Qur'an or Prophet (SAW) asked us to make pilgrimage to visit graves?! Do you have any authentic evidence?! Where did Allah (SWT) or the Prophet (SAW) directed us to seek our needs as well as forgiveness at graves of Prophets or Imams?!

For your information, all the pilgrims do visit the qabr of the Prophet (SAW) during hajj and Umrah, but that isn't their major objective, and you do not go to the grave to be asking for your needs, rather you send salaam and salawaat, this is the sunnah!

Have you guys ever thought about what you even say?! You want all Muslims to be going to the grave of the Prophet (SAW) to be asking him to help you interface with Allah (SWT) on your behalf, man and his ever increasing wants and needs?! What do you even take the Prophet(SAW) for?!

Empiree:
I believe you are referencing another verse entirely. The ayah he quoted was specific to nabi Muhammad ibn Abdullah (saw). We aren't using shariah of Isa in Maryam (as) now, abi?. . I'm I right?

Brother, I am sure of the verse I quoted, and I know that it is about Prophet Isa (AS), for there is a similar information in an authentic narration which shows the fact that the Prophet (SAW) does not know what you all are doing after his demise.

From Sahih Bukhari

Volume 8, Book 76, Number 533:

Narrated Ibn ‘Abbas: The Prophet stood up among us and addressed (saying) “You will be gathered, barefooted, Unclad, and uncircumcised (as Allah said): ‘As We began the first creation, We shall repeat it.’ (21.104) And the first human being to be dressed on the Day of Resurrection will be (the Prophet) Ibrahim Al-Khalil.
Then will be brought some men of my community who will be taken towards the left (i.e., to the Fire), and I will say: ‘O Lord! My companions whereupon Allah will say: You do not know what they did after you left them. I will then say as the pious slave, ‘Isa (Jesus) said, “And I was witness over them while I dwelt amongst them………. (up to) …the All-Wise.” (5.117-118).

The narrator added: Then it will be said that those people (relegated from Islam, that is) kept on turning on their heels (deserted Islam).

This is the words of the Prophet (SAW) himself, and nowhere did he command that you come visit his grave for your needs, rather what we have on record is about his strict warning not to take his grave as a place of festivity or worship! Except you can fault this narration, and by extension, explain the Qur'anic verse, then I see no substantive evidence for your claims.

For your information, everyone would come back to "life" after death, or what did all the questioning in the grave is all about?! And yes, the dead can hear and there is a limit to that too, not to mention that the Prophet (SAW) had given us the proper thing to do at the graves when we visit, he didn't inform us to seek forgiveness when we come to his grave, did you all think that the sahabas never read the verse (4:64), that they wouldn't have besieged the Prophet's grave every night and day?! Or they had no need to seek forgiveness?!

And with regards to the benefit of the Prophet dead or alive, that is already established, we send salams to him and Allah (SWT) rewards us in manifold, it has nothing to do with seeking for our needs from Allah (SWT), it is better we follow his teachings so as to get our needs fulfilled by Allah (SWT)!

Empiree:
Sheikh Rabiu Adebayo quoted this ayah severally in a lecture explaining the ayah just as you did. Said they simply bilittled nabi(saw).

That's the problem they have. Another hadith clearly says “My life is better for you and my death is better for you . . .” . I guess they would say it is daif. If Quran acknowledges shuhada aren't dead but alive, are shuhada greater and better than the prophet(saw).

The story Albaqir quoted is not evidence, it is unsubstantiated and at best, it is just a story, it can never stand as an evidence in issues of the shari'ah. I will quote the Qur'an, then I would want you to tell me what it means...

"I said not to them except what You commanded me - to worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord. And I was a witness over them as long as I was among them; but when You took me up, You were the Observer over them, and You are, over all things, Witness." (Q 5:117)

Really, there is no need going back and forth on visiting graves or masjid, all we need to know is how the shi’a take this visit, and what they do at this visit. Do they have the backing from the Qur’an?!

Sometimes it really doesn’t take much to see the humongous lies in what is not legislated in Islam, because when man tries to play God, he fumbles woefully, let me furnish our readers with some of the alleged merits of this ziyarat of Husein (ra)…

Merit of visiting the grave of Imam Husayn (a.s.)

Visiting the grave of Imam Husayn (a.s.) is recommended, while emphasis upon visiting his grave is among the necessities of the Religion. It is related that the visitation to his grave is essential upon every believer and is obligatory upon every man and woman. While one who abandons it, in fact has abandoned the rights of Allah and His Prophet, while abandoning it is ungratefulness with the Prophet of Allah (S) and is a result of a defect in his belief and Religion. And the one who deliberately avoids it, he shall be among the dwellers of hell.

Imam Muhammad al Baqir (a.s.) told Muhammad bin Muslim that, “Direct our Shi’ah to visit the grave of Husayn bin Ali (a.s.), for it has been made obligatory by Allah, the Mighty, the Sublime, upon every believer who considers Husayn (a.s.) to be his Imam”.

Imam Ja’far as Sadiq (a.s.) says that,
“Whenever anyone amongst you go for the Hajj and then do not go for the pilgrimage of Imam Husayn (a.s.) has abandoned the right from among the rights of the Prophet of Allah (S). For the right of Husayn (a.s.) is made obligatory upon every Muslim by Allah”.

He says that, “The one who dies without going to the head of the grave of Husayn (a.s.), while he still considers himself to be our Shi’ah, is in fact not our Shi’ah, and even if he goes to Paradise, he will remain as a guest of the inhabitants of Paradise”.

He (Imam Sadiq) asked Aban bin Taghlib,
“O Aban! When did you go for the pilgrimage to the grave of Imam Husayn (a.s.)?”
Aban replied, “By Allah, O son of the Prophet of Allah! A lengthy time has passed since I did not renew the pledge”. Imam (a.s.) replied,
“Glory be to my Lord, the Sublime, and praise to Him! Inspite of being a nobleman among the Shi’ah you have abandoned the visitation to the grave of Husayn (a.s.)? The one who visits the grave of Imam Husayn (a.s.), Allah writes down good deeds for him at every step, and forgives his sins at each step. Then He forgives all of his past and future sins”.

Imam Ja’far as Sadiq (a.s.) said, that when the day of Qiyamah approaches, an announcer will call out, “Where are the pilgrims of Husayn (a.s.)?” A large multitude will arise, computing whose numbers would not be possible by anyone except Allah, the Mighty, the Sublime. Allah will ask them,
“Why did you visit the grave of Husayn?”

They will reply, “O Lord! We did that due to the friendship with the Prophet of Allah (a.s.) and for the sake of Ali (a.s.) and Fatemah (a.s.), and due to the sorrow that befell him”. It will be said to them,

“Here are Muhammad (S), Ali (a.s.), Fatemah (a.s.), Hasan (a.s.) and Husayn (a.s.). Go and unite with them, you shall remain along with them in their status. Unite under the standard of the Prophet of Allah (S) and remain under its shade, that is in the hands of Ali (a.s.) until all of you enter Paradise”.

Imam Ja’far as Sadiq (a.s.) says that,

“If I relate to you the merit of visiting his grave, you shall abandon the Hajj, while a group from among you would not go for the Hajj. Woe be to you! Do you not know that Allah preferred Karbala to be the Sanctuary of His peace and affluence before He chose Makkah to be His Sanctuary?”

Imam (a.s.) continued, “One day Imam Husayn (a.s.) was seated in the lap of his grandfather, while he was caressing him and smiling.”
Seeing this Ayesha said, “O Prophet of Allah! How much do you love this child?” He (S) replied,

“Woe be to you! How should I not cherish him and not be pleased with him? He is the fruit of my heart and the light of my eyes. Beware! Verily my nation will kill him, then whoever visits him (his grave) after his death, Allah will write down one of my Hajj in his account”.
Ayesha asked, “One of your Hajj?” He (S) replied, “Yes, rather two of my Hajj”. Ayesha asked, “Two of your Hajj?” and he replied, “Yes”. And as much as Ayesha started inquiring, he started increasing the amount of reward (of Hajj) until he reached ninety Hajj along with his Umrah.

Qaddah says, that I asked Imam Ja’far as Sadiq (a.s.) that, “The one who goes for the pilgrimage to the grave of Imam Husayn (a.s.), while being cognizant of his rights, and is neither an arrogant nor a denier, what has he earned?” Imam (a.s.) replied, “
One thousand accepted Hajj will be written down in his record, as also one thousand pious Umrah. And if he is a damned one, he shall be noted down as a felicitous one, and shall remain saturated eternally in the blessings of Allah”.
Source

If we are to get all this by just visiting the grave of the Prophet's grandson, one would have thought the Qur'an would have stated this categorically, since hajj is mentioned, and also one wonders, what merits are associated with visiting the Prophet's grave (SAW) abi, is the Prophet (SAW) less important than Hussein (ra)?!

vaxx:
The pinch in your eyes will not allow you to fix the tent. thanks anyway

And you would only see what you want to see...By the way, you are welcome.

vaxx:
you write up is too much for me to take my time and analyse, i do not need to state i want summary, you could have explain it in a way that will be simple and effective, am sure you read my op. since you aware , i will not be the only one reading it, you could have make it more efficient. instead of putting up article that is less catchy to the eye. the issue presented is about the ignorance of the quran, which Muslim hold in high esteem,your verses only says you are w=right , i am wrong, without substantiating with any meaningful evidence. you do not just say i am right because my religion say so. you need to provide evidence. anyway, do you go through the link i sent to you. if you cannot make your point within few lines, there is deliberate attempt that lies will accomplished your point.

This is your opinion, if you do not have the patience to read through a thousand words, then I see why your OP is full of misconceptions and misrepresentations of Islam and by extension, Muslims...I tried that, since my post is such an epistle, you focus on the Qur'anic verses quoted and critique?!

I have not established who is right or wrong in my post, you claimed you are condemned to hell in Islam because you are an idol worshiper, and I explained that is not the case in Islam, condemnation to burn in hell is by God and not the Muslim, and only when such individual warrants such punishment, and that is why it is the prerogative of God! And if you are looking for meaningful evidence with respect to Islamic teachings, what other evidence is better than those sourced from the law books of the religion?!

I didn't go through the link, and I do not obfuscate, I tend to write and read a lot when a topic interests me.

vaxx:
[s][/s]this is too much write up for me to begin dealing with, you could have put it into summary, anyway, you do not pass any message apart from accepting that you are right, i am wrong because quran say so. so my question, have you study your quran beyond reasonable conclusion to accept that what it is really saying is the truth. we can begin from there, lets talk on the position of infallibility in quran or better still click this link https://www.nairaland.com/4090123/black-muslim-stilll-slavery-bondage

My write up is too much so you decided to cancel it out to show what exactly?! You could have stated you want only summaries in your OP, and mind you, you are not the only one reading. The issue you presented isn't about the infallibility of the Qur'an, I quoted relevant verses that addresses your concerns, do you have issues with these verses? I am not forcing you to believe in them, just presenting what Islam teaches...

vaxx:
I will burn in Hell forever. I will be punished forever. I am the worst creature on planet. Even if I die, no one must wish that God have mercy on me.

No, I did not kill any child. I did not rape anyone. I did not bomb, shoot, loot or cheat anybody. In fact I always followed the law. I never committed a crime of hate, passion or greed. I took care that no one is harmed by me. I paid my taxes. I did my job honestly. Sometimes in name of God, sometimes in name of my ancestors, I made charity to poor and orphans. When boko haram shot and kidnap about 133 children in chibok .. I mourned as if I lost my own family.

My deadly crime

But all this does not make me a nice person. My crime is far worse than anything else you can . That is why, God will still forgive a rapist or murderer but will never forgive me.

Do you know what my heinous crime is? It is IDOL WORSHIP.

My crime is that I see God in idols. My crime is that I go to shrines instead of mosque. My crime is that I pay obeyance to ogun, sango , osun and the nist supreme olodumare

No I am not joking. In eyes of a very dominant chunk of world population, my crime is the worst crime of humanity. They believe that I am the most disgusting creature on earth.

Hate in name of religion

I am called a Kafir which is an abuse that means ‘a disgusting person who commits most wicked crime’.

They say that their Holy Book tells that idols-worshipper is worst of creatures.

Now I don’t care what their Holy Book actually says. I don’t even know the language of their Holy Book. I assume that any religion teaches only peace and tolerance. And hence their religion must also be no exception.

But what worries me is that the entire community leadership is unanimous on this hatred. They may differ on how to deal with a wretched person like me on earth. But the moment I die, all agree that I must not be called “Marhoom” – one who gets mercy of God.

They will not participate in my festivals. They will not pray for me when I die. They will always consider me most disgusting.

Come what may happen, whatever be my good deeds, no one will say that I can also be blessed with Paradise by God. Even if I die saving life of an idol-hater, even if I selflessly dedicate my life to humanity, I will still burn in fire of Hell.

No Muslim is expected to say you vaxx are going to hell, that is clearly not what Islam teaches, but rather Muslims can tell you the actions and deeds that can lead to hellfire according to Islam.

Since you have openly admitted to be worshipping idols, then you are a mushrik (polytheist/pagan)! This is not an insult, it is what you practice. A kaafir is an unbeliever (generally speaking), it also means to reject, to conceal or cover something and in this case, it means concealing/covering the truth (Islam) after it had been made manifest to you.

Technically speaking, you are not to be referred to as a Kaafir, if you haven’t heard the message of Islam and rejecting it afterwards….
Whoever is guided is only guided for [the benefit of] his soul. And whoever errs only errs against it. And no bearer of burdens will bear the burden of another. And never would We punish until We sent a messenger. (Q17:15)

With regards to the bold above,

Shaykhul-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah said, "I have always been among the most stringent people in prohibiting that a specific person be accused of disbelief, dissoluteness or sinfulness until the proof has been established to him (beyond the excuse of ignorance) by a Messenger of Allaah, such that the one contravening it is, in some instances, a disbeliever, in others, a person of bad moral character and in others, a sinner. And I affirm that Allaah excuses this Community of its mistakes, whether it be in matters of beliefs or actions."

He reiterated elsewhere: "Textual evidence in the Quran and Sunnah indicates that Allaah does not punish anyone until the message of Truth reaches him, as brought to him by a Messenger from Allaah. Those who have not received the message of Truth or received a distorted or incomplete version of the message will not be punished except for what they have denied of what has reached them through the Messenger of Allaah. This is affirmed in the verse that reads (what means): {[We sent] messengers as bringers of good tidings and warners so that mankind will have no argument against Allaah after the messengers....} [Quran 4:165]"

Going further, Islam teaches Muslims to be respectful and not go about insulting people and what they worship besides Allah (SWT). Although not all Muslims follow this instruction, but that shouldn’t be the basis for judging what Islam preaches. Allah (SWT) says:

"And do not insult those they invoke other than Allah, lest they insult Allah in enmity without knowledge. Thus We have made pleasing to every community their deeds. Then to their Lord is their return, and He will inform them about what they used to do." (Q6:108)

As Muslims, we believe the final judgement is with Allah (SWT), and we know that not everyone would believe in Islam…

“And had your Lord willed, those on earth would have believed, all of them together. So, will you (O Muhammad SAW) then compel mankind, until they become believers.” (Q15:99)

Your crime which is associating partners with God is a big issue, it negates the fundamental principle of Islam, which is the belief that there is no god except Allah, no lesser gods, no partners, no child or children, no wife or mother etc. God is one! And worship should be directed to God alone! If the foundation is weak and bad, no matter the beautiful structure built on it, it would definitely collapse sooner or later! God is not interested in your good deeds alone, but also the drive behind your deeds…A man who publicly donates to charity but he is an armed robber or kidnapper, would you suggest that the law should overlook the source of his income/wealth?!

If you could associate partners with God in worship, then what determines you are doing any righteous deed for God?! If you say you are not doing for God, then what is the essence of worship and why do you expect a reward from God?!

In Islam, all what you do for the sake of God is classed as worship, including your mundane activities, and thus you would be rewarded both in this life and the next, but if not for God, then you get your reward here, and if it is a sin, then definitely you’d get the punishment both in this life and the next.

The message of Islam is simple and straightforward, worship the one true creator! If Sango, Ogun and the likes were true prophets of God, then they would only had informed people about the one true God and to worship Him and would never claim worship for themselves!

"And We did not send any Messenger before you (O Muhammad SAW) but We inspired him (saying): La ilaha illa Ana [none has the right to be worshipped but I (Allah)], so worship Me (Alone and none else)." (Q21:25)

If after you have learnt about the message of Islam and still reject it, and hold on to your beliefs, then, you do not need to start complaining about Islam and what Islam preaches with regards to the fate of non-Muslims, since on the last day, Allah (SWT) says:

“On This Day every soul will be recompensed for what it earned. No injustice today!” (Q 40:17)

Be rest assured that there would never be injustice on the Day of Judgment, the question is, are you just with your views of Islam?! Have you studied it sincerely (with an open-mind)?! Have you any divine evidence for worshiping the creation in association with the creator?! If God asks you today vaxx, did all these idols you have mentioned gave you the permission to worship them, or did God give you the permission to worship these creations in association with Him?! Do you have your answers and evidences to back them up?!

AlBaqir:
al-Razi's submissions are more accurate and in detailed here (than my presentation of his submission):

http://library.islamweb.net/newlibrary/display_book.php?bk_no=132&ID=477&idfrom=1620&idto=1625&bookid=132&startno=2

Okay, I think you had misrepresented Ar-Razi's submissions, also I see that Ar-Razi likes talking about "issues" with regards to verses of the Qur'an, hence stating different opinions, which I believe may not be what he himself agrees with.

AlBaqir:
# Same Quran in sura al-Hujurat says, "O mankind! We created you from a male and a female..."

Even the verse in question states this fact too

AlBaqir:
So, the discussion is not really about "children of Adam", but Eve herself.

# Whichever way we try to interpret the verse "... and its mate from it" does not suggest either from "rib or clay". And don't forget the pronoun particle "it (haa)" makes it difficult to take it back to Adam i.e saying "...its mate from it (Adam)". Obviously, Adam was not " it". The submission of "being created from rib" using the abovementioned hadith does not work for reason stated earlier.

Of course I agree the issue is the creation of Eve, and thank you, the verse didn't mention the how, whether rib or clay, so it is really not important!

Ar-Razi did mention that the "ha" was indeed referring to the "nafs" which is agreed upon to be Adam, being in the feminine form is due to the word "nafs" which is feminine, and he went ahead to quote a verse of the Qur'an and a poet to support the usage as such.

Those who hold the position of the rib do have a point, even if there is a possibility that the narration is figurative, at least, there is a narration that supports their stand. One of the argument of Ar-Razi in response to the rib story was that, what was the possible advantage creating Eve from the rib when it is established that Allah (SWT) is capable of creating man from clay...My own response to this would be; the hadith(s) indicates the probable wisdom (advantage) behind this, and would it have been impossible for Allah (SWT) to have created Eve from Adam's rib?!

All in all, it is just the opinions of scholars based on the evidences available and considered worthy, Allah (SWT) wouldn't ask us how Eve was created whether from rib or clay on the last day!

AlBaqir:
........
While the likes of Sunni mufasir, Ibn Kathir stubbornly adhere to the literal meaning of the above hadith to interpret the verse, hence, concluding that " eve was created from the rib of Adam", the likes of another Sunni mufasir, Fakhr al-din Razi in his Tafsir al-Kabir argued that "nafs" here with pronoun particle of "it" does not refer to "Adam, a living man" rather the "nafs" was still in the spirit form. Hence, both Adam and Eve were created from the same "spirit - Nafs". According to Abdullah Yusuf Ali (in his English translation and commentary of the Quran) who also agrees and quotes Fakhr al-din Razi, he argued that " the idea of creation of Eve from Adam's rib" is Christianic/Israelite idea that crept into Islamic thoughts.

@Bold, you need not state this, or did you have any evidence to back up your claim?!

Secondly, I would appreciate if you can quote Ar-Razi's argument (above in red) with reference, I seem not to find it!

AlBaqir:
2. In Shi'a tafsir like tafsir al-Mizan, Allama Tabatabai also argued that the "nafs" refer to Adam but the pronoun particle "it" goes back to the clay from which Adam was created. Hence, his mate (Eve) was created (also) from it (clay).

Allamah Hussein Tabatabai threw out the idea of Eve being created from Adam's rib and affirm his argument by an hadith of Imam Muhammad Ibn Ali ibn Hussein Ibn Ali Ibn Abi Talib, al-Baqir (as) which clearly stated that Eve was created from the remainder of the very clay that Adam was created from.

That the "it" goes back to clay is far fetched in my own opinion, it defeats the idea that the verse initially claimed which is "...who created you (all) from one nafs" And if Allah (SWT) had created Eve from the clay, then it would have been explicitly stated, of course Allah (SWT) can create her from clay too, but if we can't find substantive evidence(s), then it is just mere speculations....

tintingz:
It seems you dont know what skepticism means, you just post things with ignorance. Skepticism is used in acquiring knowledge, seek for the truth, skepticism is used in many field be it science, court, politics etc.

Oxford dictionary defines scepticism thus:

scepticism

(North American skepticism)
NOUN
mass noun

1. A sceptical attitude; doubt as to the truth of something.
‘these claims were treated with scepticism’

2. Philosophy
The theory that certain knowledge is impossible.
‘Cartesian scepticism’

In Mariam-Webster:

Definition of skepticism

1 : an attitude of doubt or a disposition to incredulity either in general or toward a particular object

2. a : the doctrine that true knowledge or knowledge in a particular area is uncertain
b : the method of suspended judgment, systematic doubt, or criticism characteristic of skeptics

3 : doubt concerning basic religious principles (such as immortality, providence, and revelation)

In your favorite website wiki we have the following:

Definition[edit]

In ordinary usage, skepticism (US) or scepticism (UK) (Greek: 'σκέπτομαι' skeptomai, to search, to think about or look for; see also spelling differences) can refer to:

In philosophy, skepticism can refer to:

1. a mode of inquiry that emphasizes critical scrutiny, caution, and intellectual rigor;
2. a method of obtaining knowledge through systematic doubt and continual testing;
3. a set of claims about the limitations of human knowledge and the proper response to such limitations.

When you are in a religious section, and asking people to be sceptic, what kind of scepticism are you speaking of?! If you claim that scepticism is about acquiring knowledge, and seeking for the truth, then how does this knowledge and truth come to be?! What is the truth?! If you claim it is about scientific scepticism, then that only deals with observable phenomena, and once the phenomena cannot be observed, then it becomes philosophical,and here I brought forth what authoritative conclusion of a philosophical sceptic (David Hume). Science has its limits, and once science reaches its limit, speculations are made in the name of theories, and that my friend isn't science, but pseudoscience! For your information, science use scepticism to be objective, and to falsify theories (which are largely philosophical). Science has a standard of what it considers to be right or wrong, based on empirical evidences, it continues to test based on this standard of observation and experimentation (the scientific method). But you have no standard, you yourself claim that what is right is relative!

tintingz:
The bedrock of modern science is not religion but skepticism, the Europeans started the modern scientific revolution, the Greeks are the founder of scientific revolution, the medeival muslim conquest of the persians, egypts, Byzantine empire around 800-1429 made the muslims gain access to their works and influenced by it, many of the works of the medieval muslims Scientists lack innovation, while some scholars said while it produce innovation, it did not lead to a scientific revolution! The muslim scientific revolution stopped around that period.

This is balderdash! Yeah the Europeans just picked up science from thin air right?! I can't help but laugh at this your history of Muslim scientists, they lack innovation?! Being an atheist does not mean you should always find ways to discredit religious people na, you are being a fanatical atheist. Just to keep things in proper perspective:

"An intellectual revitalization of Europe started with the birth of medieval universities in the 12th century. The contact with the Islamic world in Spain and Sicily, and during the Reconquista and the Crusades, allowed Europeans access to scientific Greek and Arabic texts, including the works of Aristotle, Ptolemy, Jābir ibn Hayyān, al-Khwarizmi, Alhazen, Avicenna, and Averroes. European scholars had access to the translation programs of Raymond of Toledo, who sponsored the 12th century Toledo School of Translators from Arabic to Latin. Later translators like Michael Scotus would learn Arabic in order to study these texts directly. The European universities aided materially in the translation and propagation of these texts and started a new infrastructure which was needed for scientific communities. In fact, European university put many works about the natural world and the study of nature at the center of its curriculum, with the result that the "medieval university laid far greater emphasis on science than does its modern counterpart and descendent." (wiki)

The bedrock of modern science is religion, and Muslims played a major role in this, and some of these Muslim scientist's contributions are still much relevant till today!

tintingz:
Right is relative which might be wrong to you, saying i am right in an argument is egoistic, but making people reason and question things is the best way for people to know the truth themselves.

If your right is different from my own right after these reasoning and questioning, then why would you be angry and intolerant of these subjective conclusions which are contrary to yours?! Each individual has their personal reason for their decisions, since you do not have a standard of what is right or wrong, then you have no right to condemn! Even if they believe in fairy tales! So again, you cannot give what you do not have!

tintingz:
You are posting someone's problem and making it a fact. Dude haba!

Are you saying there are no religious people with this problems? Psychosis like you called it?

This is not someone's problem, but a problem inherent in scepticism, especially when it is philosophical. You hide under science, but science has limitations, the other day I was asking you about the big bang and if observable when science said they have little or no knowledge about what happened immediately after the big bang, this makes any conclusion about the events of the big bang mere speculations, philosophical, which if subjected to the rigor of scepticism, would eventually lead to "psychosis". Let me help you further get the perspective:

"The skeptics began as philosophers who were determined to live by the dictates of philosophical theory, no matter what those dictates were. Their happiness depended entirely on possessing the correct theory of nature and of good life. But they soon discovered that for every theory of reality supported by philosophical reasons, they could find a contrary theory equally well supported, and so they were forced to suspend judgment. This led to depression." (Philosophical Melancholy and Delirium: Hume’s Pathology of Philosophy by Donald W. Livingston)

This actually reminds me of your favourite line, "science is yet to know" yeah, perpetual uncertainty!

tintingz:
Scientists are skeptics, why are you having problem with skepticism? i asked you in my previous post, between gullibility and skepticism, which leads to enlightenment and truth?

I do not have a problem with scientific scepticism, but we are talking about religion here, the existence of God, the reality of beliefs, this is philosophical. As noted already, science has its limits, even when it comes to observable phenomena.

tintingz:
Psychosis is when you talk to a fairy entity and thinks he is hearing you calling it prayers, imagine praying this way "oh gravity gravity gravity protect me or facing a direction and chanting gravity is mighty, gravity is mighty", thats insanity.

Are you certain that this God who those who worship and pray to every day and their prayers answered (remember, subjective right) does not exist?! If I tell you that I have experienced this (answered prayers) and still do, am I wrong?! If yes, why?!

tintingz:
Skepticism is doubting and questioning things to gain more knowledge about things around you.

Yes I know, you doubt, you question, but you are still uncertain of the answers too, so you keep doubting...And it continues...

tintingz:
Imagine coming to you that there is an invisible giant tea pot revolving round the earth, wont you doubt and question me, is that not being skeptical?

Of course I would, but what would be my basis of this scepticism?! Why should I continue to be sceptical if you claim knowledge which I do not have?! Why should I believe you?!

You do believe whatever the scientist tell you, you didn't observe any red shift or saw how the expansion of the galaxies are moving, but you trust these scientist as credible people, but unfortunately, there have been reports of doctored scientific research, and sentimental reporting not to even mention the fact that what was being observed might have been incorrectly interpreted, yet you still believe! Why?!

On the other hand, I have the Qur'an, the Prophet (SAW) was not a fairy tale, his existence is confirmed, his story was reported and recorded, he was known to be truthful and honest, a man of integrity, he didn't claim to be God, he struggled to spread a message of this one God, to worship and be righteous. He wasn't enriching himself or his family, he didn't even have a heir to inherit him after his demise. He was able to transform a barbaric group of people into a vibrant and civilized people. The message of Islam is not in conflict with man's nature, we seek answers to fundamental question with regards to life and purpose, we are at convinced and contended with what we have found, and we believe!

tintingz:
Actually, religious terrorists pray daily, i guess prayer is impotent to them.

One can be nice, kind, forgiving without prayers or religion, your empathy can do that, if your kindness is because of prayer, i dont think such person is genuinely kind.

I dont pray and i still show kindness to people, that's humanism.

Good for you, but that does not discredit the scientific findings! You may as well start your research from here, go look for terrorist and test, then come back to give us your findings!

tintingz:
How many Muslim scientists have changed the world? I applaud the medieval Muslim scientists but they didn't actually made the scientific revolution of today.

Science and scientist build on previous knowledge, and I am authoritatively telling you that Muslim scientists were the foundation of modern science!

At this juncture, the remainder of your responses only consolidates my assertions, which is authoritatively supported by philosophical skeptics I had quoted earlier, there is no iota of intellectual reasoning behind them, you are filled with hate and pessimism, you are intolerant and a whiner! You do not want to take responsibility for your inadequacies and so scared of the consequences. You only see doom and gloom in the world and this shows in your line of questioning, you do not have answers, you do not have hope, you are just venting your frustration online, there is no fastest way to depression and psychosis than this. You can't help yourself, talk more of helping others, you said your motive is the world, and you think this line of questioning is what the world needs?! Well good Luck on your quest! Come back here when you have achieved your aim! I will be the first to congratulate you!

tintingz:
This dude here is Funny, it is interesting tho. I thought you are more intelligent than this, no offense.

Between gullibility and doubting, which lead to enlightenment and truth?

Skepticism is what led to enlightenment, check out the ancient Greeks, it is their skepticism that led to science and philosophy, people believe the Gods were the cause of sickness, thunder, rain etc, it was doubt and reasoning that result to questioning and researches that led to enlightenment. Damn, sino you are disappointing.

Doubting something is not a window to insanity, you are just using your psychological projection on this, what actually looks like a window to psychosis is when people pray to an imaginary entity for protection, imagine talking to yourself calling it prayers.

I have advised you to always understand something before making claims. You want to create doubt, but you are not certain of the facts (you said you are not here to claim to be right abi?), hence you are in doubt about everything! For the record, the bedrock of modern science is religion, many religious men were in the forefront of scientific breakthroughs, they had firm believe in God, yet they were excellent scientist...

If you claim to be a skeptic, then let me help you understand why you are prone to psychosis, pay attention, and learn from an authority:

"Given this tawdry state of affairs, it is surprising that so few modern defenders of skepticism have anything interesting to say about how to live with or understand their skeptical conclusions. (Some Greek and Roman skeptics actually did try to live in conformity with their skeptical beliefs).

David Hume (1711-76), perhaps the greatest skeptic of them all, struggled valiantly with this conflict. According to Hume, we face a difficult dilemma. On the one hand, we must respect philosophical reasoning (or, as he calls it, “refin’d reflection”). It is our only defense against ignorance, superstition, and other beliefs governing daily life which, one and all, originate in ‘illusions of the imagination’. On the other hand, we can’t run our lives on the conclusions of refin’d reflection since

“…the understanding, when it acts alone, and according to its most general principles, entirely subverts itself, and leaves not the lowest degree of evidence in any proposition, either in philosophy or common life.” [This and the following Hume quotes are from A Treatise of Human Nature, Book I, Part IV, section VII].

Midway through his discussion, Hume asserts that there is no rational solution to this problem, but that we don’t need one. Although reason makes no headway here, ‘nature’ seems to solves the problem in favor of ‘common life.’ One can only entertain skeptical conclusions for so long before

“…[nature] cures me of this philosophical melancholy and delirium, either by relaxing this bent of mind, or by some avocation and lively impression of my senses, which obliterates all these chimeras. I dine, I play a game of back-gammon, and I am merry with my friends; and when after three or four hours’ amusement, I wou’d return to these speculations, they appear so cold, and strain’d, and ridiculous, that I cannot find it in my heart to enter into them any farther.”

Source

When I say you are tending towards psychosis, it wasn't just a figment of my imagination, it is a real problem you face!

Secondly, prayer has been said to have benefits by SCIENCE which includes; Self control, helping people to become nicer, helping people to forgive easily, increases unity and trust in couples, help people cope with stress...Source

All these can be found in reputable peer reviewed journals.

tintingz:
Check out the muslim world today and tell me what their problem is? I am not attacking, critiszing muslims but the ideology, know the difference. Your fairy book is not making lots of you reason, it makes people do silly things. Also check out Africa one of the most religious continent, tell me if they are moving forward or backward?

Like Karl Marx said: Religion is the opium of the masses

There are Muslim scientists all around the world, and those of other religion, Islam never is responsible for any backwardness, at least we know from history the role Muslims played in the acquisition and spread of beneficial knowledge including science! As i pointed out earlier, religious people were at the forefront of advancement in different aspects of modern science.

If you want people to take you seriously, quote verses of the Qur'an that prevents research and acquiring beneficial knowledge, not this your recycled argument found online!

tintingz:
And you also made a fallacious statement if i am now a millionaire since i am an atheist, Lol... you dont know my personal life, how i work, where i work, what i have in my account , you already assumed a sarcastic statement if i am now a millionaire? My motive is not for my selfish gain or interest but for the world!

My questions were rhetorical. How does denying a creator help your motive?! As already established, religious people are very involved in science. If you want to be useful to the world, it is not by ranting about how Allah (SWT) is not perfect and how Allah (SWT) does not exist! You contribute meaningfully to the environment and the people, and for your information, that is what Islam teaches. All you have been doing here is egocentric, it is very obvious in your posts.

tintingz:
So what answer as your religion provided to the cure of cancer? I am interested in knowing what beneficial thing your religion as deliver to humanity.

Why must I doubt the existence of God before I can do research and find a cure for cancer? Islam says "there is no disease without a cure" this only suggest that we should seek cures for diseases, and not rest until it is found! It encourages science! So what are you on about?!

Islam has given meaning to life, purpose of life, hope, unity and peace to billions and billions of human being, and till tomorrow, people see the truth and embrace the religion in the multitude, because it resonates with man's soul! Believe in one creator and worship this one creator in all you do!

tintingz:
Lol, the answer to origin of the universe is the 6 days creation in the Quran or the 7 days creation in the bible or the Olorun sending Obatala, oh yeah we all know the origin of the universe! Or why there is life is Allah creating Adam and Eve only for him to also create satan that will lead people to hell, oh Allah really wants people to worship him daily and recite a fairy book, yeah that is why there is life!

Why there is good and bad(evil), i think Allah should also answer that, he is the source of these, he should answer that.

Apparently, you have no answers, you are in perpetual doubt and uncertainty!

tintingz:
SMH, You asked what do i gain from this or why attacking, and i answered i want people to be skeptical, question and reason only for you to pick "skeptic" and said i am confused? is this how you reason? why are you playing the non sequitur game?

You didn't attend to the OP question rather attacking the person of the OP and his motive, that is ad hominem dude, it is a fallacious argument.

Is skepticism not part of your aim?! So I cannot pick one of your aim to probe further?! because?

You are indeed confused, you said you are not here to prove you are right (since you are not sure, remember you are skeptic ), and then said you want people to be skeptic, that is to be in doubt, based on the fact that you yourself is in doubt! Are you certain of the reason for doing what you are doing?! Are you sure of what you are doing or you are skeptical?!

tintingz:
I have knowledge of what i am saying, why not answer the question the OP presented with your knowledge and stop playing the non sequitur and ad hominem game.

If you couldn't decipher responses to the Op from my posts, then you should consider evening classes in comprehension!

tintingz:
Lol, your absurdity here is alarming. Pseudo-intelligent? Your psychological projection is decieving you.

Allah created humans, wants humans to be righteous by worshiping him leaving humans with two options, reject and go to hell, worship him and go to paradise. If Allah actually want us not to do anything and give us freewill, given two options is not freewill but force and threats!

Allah is all knowing he does not know satan will rebel or he knew but decide not to stop satan, does such God deserve worship?

You are absolutely free, as an atheist, i guess you do not believe in good and bad (evil), there is no consequences and no responsibilities, just do as you wish, nobody is forcing you not to.

tintingz:
Allah created humans perfectly shaped, he didn't know humans will need flying ability to fly to far places but want humans to spend huge money to travel which is even risky, is that God perfect and all knowing?

Chai! Well, to start with, Allah (SWT) gave man the capacity to use his God-given brain to invent the plane. But you are not grateful for this blessings, so you want to have wings like birds right?! How will that fit into our present anatomy?! It is even ridiculous to think of, chai!

But anyways, the maximum speed of the fastest bird according to Wiki is 389 Km/h, while one of the fastest passenger plane AirbusA380 is 1087Km/h.

Allah gave man the brain to invent such, but silly you wants to fly like a bird, how lowly you think!

tintingz:
Allah created the women in "perfect" shape he doesn't know this will cause chaos to men and to correct this he gave a divine law for women to cover their whole body just because of his fault?

You are attracted to this shape aren't you?! I'm sure you love these beautiful shape of women and when you were a Muslim, it pained you that you are not supposed to look at strange women's shape except for your wife? Ha! Thanks to atheism, you are now free to look as much as you want! Congratulations!!! It would make sense if we all go naked like animals in the forest after all we are animals! You know what, when you marry, tell your wife to always go out naked, tell your female children to go out naked, perhaps tell all the females in your family to go out naked! Why?! Because covering the female body is absurd, evolution had made these things for our pleasure!

tintingz:
Allah created humans he doesn't know some people will turn homosexual, only for him to kill them in Sodom and Gomorrah?

Allah knows, and Allah warned them as Allah warns you too. His creations, and His prerogative to discipline them for their crime. What can you do?! Disbelieve?! Who cares?!

tintingz:
Allah created natural disasters for no reason and said he created everything perfectly, if you see this your God as perfect and all knowing sorry i dont.

You are going to DIE one way or the other, hate Allah, make fun and mockery, it doesn't change anything! Since you stop believing in Allah (SWT), did that stop anything?! There billions of Muslims all around the world, each being grateful and seeking the Mercy of Allah (SWT), so who cares?!

tintingz:
When "attack" is used in a debate or argument it means responding or questioning a premise, so what do I gain in this, I've said it, I want people to be skeptical, ask questions and reason, with this we will evolve from believing in ancient myths and legends and focus on more important things.

Contradicting, this means not "everything" is perfectly created!

So, we agree Allah didn't created his creation perfectly, so let's go to the perfection of the designer which is Allah.

> Why does a perfect All-knowing Allah created his creations imperfectly (e.g humans, Satan), while he knows all what will happen in the future before creation, like Satan rebelling, humans err and the consequences for this is a terrible punishment like hell fire, why didn't he correct all these from the beginning of creation(e.g not creating Satan), why did he had to give a divine law for his perfect mistakes or game? Does this depict a perfect and all-knowing God?


This is fallacy, your first comment here isn't a response to the thread topic rather ad hominem argument.

The OP never said he wants to win any argument nor he's right, he only brought forward questions, you on your part assumed a fallacious conclusion that I want to win an argument which is not the case.

So quit the fallacy and attend to OP questions.

How many times will I answer this, you are going straw-man dude.

I don't believe in Allah Since there's no evidence for his existence, You haven't answer my question, since you strongly believe in Allah, how did you confidently know Allah is the one or the only one above the sky?

You want people to be skeptical?! So your aim is to let everyone be in perpetual state of doubt, that is really an unstable state of mind, at this rate, you would even start doubting you are alive, it is a window to psychosis! Apparently, there is no gain in what you are trying to preach, rather a lot to lose at the end of the day! If you cannot stay away from "attacking" Allah (SWT) and Muslims, when then are you focusing on other important things?! I would have expected that since you are now an atheist, you have achieved so much, you are now a millionaire?! You have published a bestseller?! You have found the cure for cancer?! Oh! You are now going to live forever?! What has your online study of the origin of the universe taught you?! Do you know why there is life?! Or why is there even good and bad (evil)?! "Nemo dat quad non habet" "You cannot give what you don't have" You have no answers bro, only skepticism!

Yeah right, you do not want to win arguments, just your intention was to make people skeptical?! Meaning you are not even sure why you are even asking the questions, because you are in doubt, you do not know what is right or wrong?! Meaning you are confused?!

Your questions are ridiculous, when I said you did not understand Islam, you were claiming ad hominem, if you want to "attack" something, you need to be fully knowledgeable about that thing, and not argue blindly!

Allah is not demanding perfection from humans, he created them in the best way for this earth which is only temporary. Your eyes are perfectly placed same as your limbs and where each and every organ is, you wouldn't want your brain to be under your feet, or your eyes to be on your belly?! When you see deformities, then you would appreciate that definitely, man is created in the best way. Allah is not demanding from you what you cannot do, and He also gave you a great deal of opportunity to repent (whenever you err) and seek Him sincerely, Allah is not forcing you to do anything, He gave you the capability and capacity to make your own decisions, so you are responsible for whatever you do, and should be ready to accept the consequences. If you no read your books (or you go dey read anoda tin wey no concern you), you come fail, na the lecturer fault?! When you acknowledge your limitations and your imperfections, instead of your egocentric skepticism and your pseudo-intelligence, then you would realize the need to seek God, who is Perfect in all ramifications!

tintingz:
Because it's a public matter that's expressed publicly!

Okay, so what do you intend to gain from this "attack"?!

tintingz:
Lol, Ok since I'm ignorant of Islam, kindly explain what Allah meant by he created "everything" perfectly.

Allah (SWT) created everything in the best way, precise in form, shape or image, so you can distinguish a man, a bird, a snake etc. This does not suggest perfection of the creation, but rather that of the creator!

tintingz:
Is this fallacy? Is argument all about winning or dialogue?

You ask why? Why not first tell me how you confidently know the fairy entity up there is Allah then I can tell you my why.

Please, you already stated that I am discrediting you in the "eyes" of the audience, you already came with the intent to argue and prove that you are right, that is quite evident in your posts including this. So there is no dialogue, only argument of which you want to win and I asked why?

Again, that you do not believe in Allah (SWT) is not news, we all know that, tell us why you are here, attacking and asking these questions?! Are you not confident enough to give your reasons?!

tintingz:
Ad hominem as usual.

Typical for theists when someone attack thier dogmas, "oh he or she lack adequate understanding" just because such person left the religion and doesn't share same ideology with them. This silly strategy is used to make the audience see the person of OP as less important and ignorant.

This is also common when Sunni and Shia are arguing, they result to ad hominem argument instead of responding to topic at hand.

Why "attack" their dogmas?!

Anyways, your questions gives you away as being ignorant of Islam, or at best feigning ignorance! You even went ahead to quote verses which only depicts more of your ignorance!

You want to argue, and you want to win arguments, perhaps to validate your denial, but the real question is, why?!

usba:
It takes a fool not to know that in Islam God is the only One that is considered Perfect. Humans are not considered perfect even by a long short in Islam.

It is quite unfortunate that the OP was a Muslim, a question like this buttresses the fact that he lacked adequate understanding of the religion in the first instance!

Exciton:
Hypocrisy? Double standard? Surely you do not understand the meaning of liberalism. Criticism of ANYONE'S assertions, moral outlook, ideologies etc is at the heart of liberalism. Even an extremist can be liberal as long as he is willing to bring forth his ideas to the altar of liberalism for test via criticisms as well as criticize others' ideas!!

The real irony is the fact that, like the OP, Muslims [and Christians, and basically all religious groups] love talking about their superior moral standing WITH RESPECT TO "kufrs" + talking about how their views are the right ones HOWEVER you guys [MUSLIMS MOST ESPECIALLY] do not want a level playing field whereby your views are EQUALLY OPEN TO CRITICISMS! You criticize others but prefer protection from criticisms, exclusivity, the right to take offense to criticisms, and blasphemy laws.

Now, that's double standards!

I am not the intolerant one, I'm merely criticizing OP's views. The honest fact is that your religion needs massive reforms to ensure peaceful co-existence, not just in Nigeria but everywhere!

I would like for you to enlighten me with regards to this libralism you preach, preferably you quote an authority. Also I would like to understand why in the name of "criticism", you decided to rant, using abusive and vulgar words while you claim to be tolerant?

Criticism of the Islamic religion isn't something new, we deal with it accordingly, but I guess you wouldn't go to Aso-rock to go start calling the president unprintable names, or would you?! Heck! You dare not talk rudely to your boss if you are employed!

I am sure if you presented your "criticism" of the moral codes embedded in Islam in a more civilized manner, you would be responded to accordingly.

Sissie:
@empiree @sino I wonder why you people bother to argue with him, because one can’t even have an intellectual conversation with him. It’s one thing to discuss with an intellectual atheist about religion, but this one ehn....

You guys are trying oh.

I was sincerely hoping he would see the folly in his blind faith in science, but I know he is beyond redemption, especially with his current attitude. Don't mind me sef, I sometimes kick myself after clicking the quote button on his posts

tintingz:
Also with Allah, prove me wrong.

On the contrary Mr., I only borrowed your "reasoning" to show you that a lot of what you believe is science, are just tales by moonlight!

I have already pointed to you that the fact that we are here, as well as the universe gives the most credible evidence of a creator, Allah (SWT).

Please, I did overlooked a post from you, and it has to do with you being a mistake of evolution, since evolution isn't perfect and very dumb! Care to shed more ligh on this?